From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C788138010 for ; Mon, 1 Oct 2012 00:09:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1380A21C0A5 for ; Mon, 1 Oct 2012 00:09:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pa0-f53.google.com (mail-pa0-f53.google.com [209.85.220.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EB9A21C0A5 for ; Sun, 30 Sep 2012 22:22:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by padbj3 with SMTP id bj3so4415317pad.40 for ; Sun, 30 Sep 2012 15:22:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=7e1BuivZ+axpE2PUO2Gv3faKkafGkzq7M+Tkor/qapU=; b=NLsqO9WQeonhTy9eO1Tm1cD6NgCclUoP92yUMbYdZjOosZKLwvSApcS25Kh4sVFSpl YNKwggJMfj2hznJI/FYclVlCTKrA916UFjGuNLrHrlXcyocIyjppaHN7CM9zIFnxQqRl wMmNsFUO/gY1yd7KwuWLNZHfy+3Gq7NiidvMouO/0w0xxbMEMF1dVFkej4IvnjSRNYbP ofuGnDkq1mlVcU7DqlAGbWk0cMQONBG5pkYHiKhW+NrFmblW83tl615oPgBqUD5wtos4 f+avO15p6DDcb20GI8JFCZfzYWPuGPY8ibvoKrFerFzOAygC39OxBvRi4r5K8lW1+CHE +BSQ== Received: by 10.68.125.133 with SMTP id mq5mr36195133pbb.138.1349043757522; Sun, 30 Sep 2012 15:22:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.gmail.com:587 (74-95-192-101-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [74.95.192.101]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id nu8sm9214046pbc.45.2012.09.30.15.22.35 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 30 Sep 2012 15:22:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by smtp.gmail.com:587 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 30 Sep 2012 15:22:35 -0700 Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2012 15:22:35 -0700 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] [PATCH] EAPI must be at least a single char. Message-ID: <20120930222235.GH2180@localhost> References: <1348993716-27744-1-git-send-email-ferringb@gmail.com> <20584.3387.660954.8184@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20120930194455.GB2180@localhost> <5068A308.3090303@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Package Manager Specification discussions X-BeenThere: gentoo-pms@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5068A308.3090303@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: 1e6116af-7e61-4ca2-9bb7-3b41152b06d0 X-Archives-Hash: b825f64e46347a09b0793ea3d772811c On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:52:40PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote: > On 09/30/2012 12:44 PM, Brian Harring wrote: > > tries to write a PM, likely fucking that up. If what you were saying > > was the actual intention behind it, that assignment would've just been > > along the lines of EAPI=("[^"]*"|'[^']*'|[^\t ]); aka "here's how you > > grab what looks like an EAPI assignment". > > I would have preferred a regex that just matches any assignment like > this, but didn't feel like bikeshedding it, since the one that's > currently in the spec works in practice. Counter point; portage doesn't actually enforce the rules of a valid EAPI name; correct me if I'm wrong obviously, but in checking the source, didn't see any such validation. If the regex were as I suggested, that would be a non issue and we'd have *guranteed* EAPI name compliance- else it wouldn't match the invalid EAPI, and would stop looking at that line (falling back to EAPI=0). Basically, I'd like y'all to spell out the actual gains of having it loose like this, especailly in light of the fact the majority PM, via relying on that alone, doesn't do EAPI value enforcement. If we used the regex I suggested in the second email, this issue goes away, and we remove a potential landmine. Clarify to me why that landmine should be left in place. ~harring